|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers)
|
|
|
Jeremy Fuentes
Mmmm, Dr. Pepper!
Posts: 1168
From: Corpus Christi, TX United States
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 05-26-2004 08:17 AM
Todd, I hope I didnt offend you. Anyways, if its help you need, this is the place. Answer a question for me. If you want to find out something on the internet, what do you do. You do a search. Yahoo, Google, etc.... Before the internet, you would have to search for it in a library or something like that. That is what you should do here. As less-experienced projectionists, we are lucky to have a site like this where professionals are here to answer questions. But just like you dont have the time to look something up, how can you expect them to have the time to answer a question that has already been answered numerous times.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 05-26-2004 10:10 AM
Yap, Yap, Yap, Yap! No more loud talkin'!!! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I think what Todd was implying is that it's difficult to search for (and I know, because recently I tried searching for that Princess II thread and couldn't find it) a specific question or topic in a forum or discussion-based system, especially one that's 5 years old and whose topics stray and/or repeat as much as this site does. "Masking Tape" came up with 84 threads. "Splice head and tail" came up with 35, including "Heads and Tails, Breakdown Etiquette, Preparing and breaking down" among others that could very well contain the topic, but often don't. Very frustrating to anyone looking for a specific answer, especially when the results aren't returned in order of most relevant. Even the site's FAQ is bloated and redundant, and its link is a tiny bit of text up at the top. That's why no one reads it.
That said, with enough reading and searching, he could have found an answer. Or at least several pages of people bitching about how much they hate masking tape.
But that was no reason to threaten Todd with your toughness. I noticed in my several years reading and posting here that many members think they're tough and are quick to post their toughness by means of idle threats. "If YOU worked for me I would do THIS to you..." That's the main reason the Political Forum was taken down. Because people had to turn everything into a dick-waving contest.
That said, another reason it's a bad idea to use masking tape is because of the residue it leaves behind on the film. Even the highest quality of masking tape (3M to be believed by some) will leave goo on the picture which will project on screen. I spend more time than I need to dabbing Film Guard on reel ends of our used prints to get the glue off.
Todd, welcome to the forums! If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask in fear of people scolding you. But if you're scurred, just email me and I'll point you to the right threads. ![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
=TMP=
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-26-2004 12:38 PM
Todd,
Here's a little more explanation/rant. The theatre I work at plays a classic film every weekend, and usually a subrun indie/art film during the week. 95% of the time, the prints we receive are used.
Depending on how used the print is:
(1) I can expect to find multiple layers of old splicing tape stuck on the reel ends. If I want to salvage the frames underneath, I have to peel away all the layers of tape that everyone else before me was too lazy to peel away. This usually requires a heavy dose of naphtha or other solvent to dissolve away the adhesive.
(2) The leaders may have been taped down with masking tape on top of that, too. Masking tape makes it pretty easy to misalign the film, resulting in crushed edges (though I've seen horribly misaligned tape splices too). Sometimes the leader is overlapped by several feet, which then spills onto the floor at the end of the reel.
Masking tape also peels away just about as easily and cleanly as ancient splicing tape-- not very well. More time wasted and more naphtha used cleaning off the adhesive residue. Also, I have never seen a print where the person who broke it down used masking tape on the leaders but also took the time to peel the reel change splice rather than break or cut the splice. So in addition to peeling off his cheap masking tape I also get to peel off four bits of splicing tape (in addition to whatever was left there previously).
(3) Meanwhile, all this old, sticky tape has oozed adhesive which has transferred to multiple winds of film on both sides of the 'splice', and promptly collected dust. If I have time I'll try to clean that off too.
(4) What most people do when they are faced with the above is promptly cut another frame of film off the reel. This is why, when we ran "Bridge on the River Kwai" for example, Sessue Hayakawa started moving his mouth a second before words started coming out.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Todd Cornwall
Film Handler
Posts: 91
From: Madison, WI
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 05-26-2004 04:43 PM
Brad,
I dont expect anyone to take time out of their busy schedules to answer my questions..on their knees.or whatever. However, I feel that if someone has the time to post a nasty "I'm better than you" message directed AT me, they certain would have the time to make their nasty comment constructive. They had time to write a nasty, something your obviously ok with, but when I take offense to it, I'm out of line? I think not. Most of the people here are great and have been helpful, some feel it necessary to let everyone else know exaclty how great they are. I have no time for people like that and ordinarily wouldnt ask their opinion, but people like that have a hard time shutting up I guess. I dont mean to pick and choose advice, however, dont you think it would be best for EVERYONE to limit nasty replies? Whats the point? its nothing more than ego stroking. I've said enough, I'm done.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kyle McEachern
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 165
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 05-26-2004 05:14 PM
Todd,
To your original post, there were a couple of quick replies that didn't help very much, but neither were attacking you either. Jeremy gave an eyeroll, and Chris referred you to the rest of the thread. After that, Randy and Daryl gave more thorough answers, Brad explained a bit, etc.
None were rude to you (Some were fairly curt replies, granted, but you have to understand the number of times certain topics come up), but you took offense and started getting defensive and it turned into an argument.
The problem is that you were posting on a thread that had 37 pages worth of useful information on it, and by posting on the end of it with a question that had been answered within it, it lends itself to the question of why you're posting on a thread you haven't fully read. Sure, it's a long thread, but if you took 20 minutes or so to even skim through it and pick out the pieces of information you thought might be useful, it'd probably give you some insight into a) the answer to the question you were asking, and b) a lot more things that you might be doing wrong (Not saying you are, just that they are common and bad practices that people should be aware of).
The main point of these forums, as you've noted, is twofold: one, to help those of us who are NOT 'respected industry professionals' by being able to get information from people who ARE. And two, for people who know what they're doing to swap information about specific things that they know about but others might not.
What needs to be understood, however, is that these forums have been around for a LONG time, and TONS of questions have been answered, which is why that handy little 'Search' link is up there. It's not the easiest thing in the world to find what you want, but if you're interested in getting the information, it's out there.
The people at Google might get annoyed if you called them and said 'Hey, umm, can you help me figure out what the website is for the Hyatt Regency in Manhattan?' -- chances are they'd refer you to their website, which you can use to find the information yourself, and in the process probably say some not-so-nice things, and hang up on you.
Film-Tech is an AMAZING resource for those of us who are trying to learn and have questions, but before adding a post to a thread, it'd be curteous to at least read the thread you're posting to, to prevent people from having to go over and over the same pieces of information...in the same thread.
No offense was intended by most of the people here, and as you saw, a good percentage of them did all they could to help you out, but that's what happens when you come into a community that's existed for as long as F-T has.
Good luck with future posts, if you don't think the answer to a question has been given, then feel free to post it and I'm sure people will do everything in their power to help you out, if you simply ask nicely. Don't be discouraged, it's just a way to learn from experience.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 06-02-2004 07:41 PM
Okay, fun time:
Hey, LAKE WORTH DRIVE-IN, LAKE WORTH FLORIDA ...
YOU SUCK!!!
I got word from friends that live down there that your picture is so dim, you can't see anything! And that's not just because the new owners cut down ALL the trees surrounding the lot for no reason other than to let stray light in. Read on...
I got one of your prints! "50 First Dates" confirms that your booth sucks donkey balls which are in the advanced stages of vinegar syndrome. Not only were the reel ends FILTHY (is your makeup table in the damn field?) and haphazardly stuck on with about 5" of masking tape, but the print had a nice dancing emulsion scratch on the right side of the screen, and a BEE-AAA-UUUTIFUL hotspot melted into each frame. No wonder people can't see the picture at your theater, you have your damn bulb FOCUSED TO A POINT!!
Because of the severe warping caused by essentially burning every frame of picture, the print won't wind flat either. A nice "hump" shape to the print on your platters should have tipped you off something was wrong. Unless your platters suck, too.
As the print progresses, the picture develops a green/blue tint to it. Don't know if this was caused by the hotspotting (evaporating off the magenta layer?) or if it's just shitty lab work, but thought I'd throw it in.
I hope I never get a print from your theater again. A shame that a drive-in that was in danger of being torn down just a year ago has such abominable presentation standards. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
=TMP=
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Topic Closed
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
).
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic